User:Delaneylenore/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Name of article: Madonna della Clemenza
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I have chosen to evaluate this article because I think it shows a promising start to a Wikipedia article, but definitely needs some work. Additionally, based on the talk page, this is another student's article, so it is a good way to see how other people do on similar projects.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Lead evaluation
I think the introductory sentence is clear and concise. However, it needs a citation because the lack of support immediately lowers the credibility of the article. The lead itself is fairly well-written, including only the information relevant to the painting. There is also no information that is not later discussed in the article. The lead is concise, and only includes the basic description and important information.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

Content evaluation
This article sticks closely to the topic of the Madonna della Clemenza, and does not discuss irrelevant information. The latest articles that the author uses are both from 2016, which is relatively recent for an academic article. The other two articles are from 2015 and 2005, so overall most of the sources are fairly recent. However, I think the author has several areas of content that would greatly improve the article. For example, discussing artistic style and the context of the style. There is no discussion about the artistic style shown in the painting, the author only discusses the pose and dress of the figures.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation
Overall the tone and balance of the article is good, because there is no clear opinion or bias. One improvement is that the author references the origin of the painting, and says even though not everyone agrees, most scholars think this was a commission from Pope John VII. It is important to fairly show all sides of an issue, so including any opposing viewpoints might have been a good idea.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
One major issue with this article is lack of sources. There are only 4 sources used to support this article. One article has a working link, and the other 3 are not linked. After searching the library website I was able to find one of the 3 unlinked articles, and it does relate to the subject of the article. However in order to improve this article, there would need to be more sources to back up the claims and information used to describe this art piece.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Organization evaluation
The main strength in regards to organization is that the article is concise. Some sentence structures could be improved, and there is also passive voice used that lessens the clarity of the article. There are only 2 sections, Description and History. If the author improved the article by adding more information, it would be necessary to add more sections as well in order to help the reader find the information that they need. As of right now, however, there is not enough information to split into another section.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Images and media evaluation
There is only one image used in this article. It is the image of the piece used as the main article image, and it is a high quality picture that clearly and accurately shows the painting. The lack of images besides this one does lower the reading experience. The one image is public domain, and therefore complies to copyright regulations.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Talk page evaluation
The talk page for this article shows that this was most likely a student project for a class, because a professor and several other students offer feedback to help improve the article. Most of the feedback is clarifications or spelling corrections. This article is included in 2 WikiProjects, WikiProject Rome and WikiProject Visual Arts. It has been rated as "Start Class" for both projects.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * How can the article be improved?
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

Overall evaluation
Overall, I think that this article is definitely a start in the right direction. This article's main strength is it's concise writing style that fits in with the writing style of an encyclopedia. It could be improved by adding more well-rounded information and supported this information with more sources. Keeping this in mind, the article seems incomplete. It only covers 2 topics, and there is a lot more that could be said about an art piece like this.

Optional activity

 * Choose at least 1 question relevant to the article you're evaluating and leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page. Be sure to sign your feedback

with four tildes — ~


 * Link to feedback: